Bookmaker Business · Analytics · Russia
A bookmaker can place its logo on a team's jersey. It can also participate in creating a tournament that viewers will follow season after season. In the latter case, the competition is for the habit of watching, discussing, and returning. We explore why Russian bookmakers need their own sports shows and what this model changes for the audience.
What Sparked the Discussion
On September 18, 2026, "RB Business" published comments from representatives of BetBoom and "League of Bets" about their own sports projects. Both statements demonstrate the operators' interest in formats where the brand participates in creating the event and its media life.
BetBoom's marketing director, Mikhail Artemyev, called the proprietary project the most effective sponsorship asset for the bookmaker. In his assessment, the key advantage is the ability to manage the format and communication, rather than just being present among partners of someone else's competition. This is the position of the BetBoom representative, not an independent study of the effectiveness of the entire market.
The marketing director of "League of Bets," Viktoria Alemanova, cited the example of Media Basket. According to her, from the third to the seventh season, the number of bets on the tournament increased by 88%, and the audience grew from 5,000 to 50,000 viewers. These figures were published in a comment to "RB Business"; there is no detailed methodology for counting in this material.
The Line Between Fact and Assessment. The confirmed reason is the publication of statements from two companies. Further analysis explains the economic logic behind such an approach. It does not prove that proprietary shows have already become the main source of customer attraction for all Russian bookmakers.
How the Own Show Model Works
Traditional advertising placements have a term: when the contract ends, so does the ability to use a specific platform. A project in which the brand itself participates in development can provide new reasons for contact with the audience: announcements, broadcasts, interviews, short videos, and discussions of results.
One Event Becomes a Series of Materials
A match lasts a limited time, but its media life can be significantly longer. Before the game, viewers are offered to get acquainted with the participants; during the game, they can watch the broadcast; after, they can discuss a controversial episode. For the bookmaker, the value of such a structure lies in repeated contacts with the same person. However, each view does not necessarily indicate interest in betting.
The Brand Gains More Influence on the Format
In a proprietary or jointly developed project, the presentation, content schedule, and ways of interacting with viewers can be coordinated. The extent of such control depends on contracts and the distribution of rights. The mere presence of the bookmaker's name in the tournament title does not mean that the company owns the competition or controls all its materials.
There is an Opportunity to Track the Viewer’s Journey
If the project's channels are interconnected, it is easier for the operator to assess the sequence of actions: viewing, visiting the website, registration, further use of the service. This is useful for marketing analysis; however, causal relationships need to be proven separately. A person may have known the brand beforehand or arrived after seeing another advertisement.
Own Tournament vs. Regular Sponsorship: A Comparison
Having its own show does not eliminate partnerships with clubs and leagues. These tools solve different tasks and can be used simultaneously.
| Criterion | Sponsorship of an Existing Event | Own or Joint Project |
|---|---|---|
| Audience | Access to existing fans of the club or competition. | Need to create interest in the format itself and retain viewers. |
| Content | Opportunities depend on the sponsorship package and partner rules. | More influence on the concept and content — within agreed rights. |
| Expenses | Payment for rights and costs of using them in advertising. | In addition to promotion, production and organization costs may be required. |
| Main Risk | The brand may get lost among other partners. | The event may turn out to be expensive and fail to gather a stable audience. |
| Result Evaluation | Reach, recognition, transitions, and customer attraction. | The same indicators plus viewer return and the project's own economics. |
Therefore, the question of "which is more effective?" requires a budget, goals, and a comparable observation period. A more noticeable format does not necessarily cost less per attracted customer.
What Does an 88% Increase in Bets Mean
The Media Basket indicator attracts attention, but it cannot be automatically turned into a headline about the bookmaker's revenue growth. The number of bets does not reveal the amount of money wagered, payouts to players, or costs of conducting the tournament.
To make a full comparison of seasons, additional information would be needed:
- Number of Matches. If the number of events has increased, part of the growth may be explained by the expansion of the program.
- Number of Unique Players. Several active users may place many bets; this does not equate to the same growth in the customer base.
- Average Bet Amount. A larger number of small bets does not necessarily mean a higher cash turnover.
- Audience Definition. Arena visitors, unique broadcast viewers, and total views are different metrics.
- Costs and Retention. It is important to know how much it cost to attract viewers and whether the audience returned after the season ended.
The initial publication lacks sufficient details for calculating profitability. The correct conclusion is already: the company reported an increase in interest in its project based on selected indicators. It is impossible to independently assess its financial result based on these figures.
What Changes for the Viewer
A sports show can be an independent form of entertainment: it is watched for the game, the participants, and the interaction. At the same time, the brand has the opportunity to regularly appear in content familiar to the viewer. It is useful to note both sides of this model.
If interest in the bookmaker arises after viewing, it should be assessed separately from the impression of the tournament:
- Check the specific operator and domain. A well-known name does not replace information about the legal entity and permission to operate in the user's country.
- Study the terms. Verification, bet calculation, bonus restrictions, and payout procedures are more important than the quality of the broadcast.
- See how complaints are handled. Specific inquiries with descriptions of the problem and the outcome of its resolution are useful.
- Maintain a boundary between viewing and betting. Supporting the team does not require topping up the gaming account.
For initial acquaintance with operators, you can use reviews and ratings of bookmakers on BET RATING , comparing them with the current documents of the company itself. The brand's presence in the ranking does not replace checking its status.
Can the Model be Transferred to the CIS and Online Casinos?
This question is of interest to the audience in Russia and the CIS, but two Russian cases do not describe the entire region. To compare countries, local examples, comparable data, and a separate check of advertising and operator requirements are needed. The Russian language of the broadcast does not, by itself, determine the legal status of its advertiser.
For online casinos, the topic of attracting through entertainment content also deserves separate study. However, transferring Media Basket metrics to them is incorrect: betting on a sports event and casino products imply different usage scenarios. Streaming the gaming process is also not equivalent to organizing a sports tournament.
The general question for the reader remains the same: what role does the brand play in the content, and on what basis is it proposed to trust it? Emotional sympathy for the host, team, or show does not confirm the quality of financial services.
BET RATING Conclusion
Statements from BetBoom and "League of Bets" allow us to see a specific marketing logic: a proprietary sports project provides a reason to communicate with the viewer regularly and develop a recognizable format around the brand. For the operator, this is an opportunity, but it also comes with expenses for content, organization, and maintaining interest.
To assess success, data beyond views and the number of bets is needed. And for choosing a bookmaker—grounds more reliable than the popularity of the show. A good broadcast answers the question "is it interesting to watch?". Checking the license, rules, and payouts answers another question—"what conditions does the operator offer?".
Questions and Answers
Why does a bookmaker need its own tournament?
To develop a recognizable format, regularly release content, and maintain contact with the audience. Economic efficiency depends on expenses, attracting clients, and their subsequent behavior.
Is having its own show more profitable than regular sponsorship?
Not necessarily. A proprietary project may have more opportunities for promotion, but also more organizational expenses. Without comparable budgets and results, there is no universal answer.
Does an increase in the number of bets mean an increase in profit?
No. To assess profit, information about the amounts of bets, payouts, expenses, and other obligations of the operator is needed. The number of bets alone does not show this.
Can the reliability of a bookmaker be judged by the popularity of its show?
No. Media fame and service quality are different characteristics. It is necessary to check the specific legal entity, license, rules, payouts, and complaint handling procedures.
Sources and Editorial Disclaimer
- "RB Business": Comment by Mikhail Artemyev on BetBoom's proprietary projects . Olga Baran, September 18, 2026.
- "RB Business": Comment by Viktoria Alemanova on the media projects of the "League of Bets" . Olga Baran, September 18, 2026.
The material is prepared based on open publications. Media Basket figures are provided by a company representative; independent auditing of these indicators has not been conducted by the editorial team. The comparison of models and conclusions about methods for assessing effectiveness is an analytical review by BET RATING.
Comments 0
Please log in on the site, чтобы добавить комментарий, лайк или дизлайк.